andreas.pichler
Established
Thanks to electronic market places, its quite easy today to collect some interesting photo gear at reasonable prices - and make comparisons.
Here we go: Jupiter 3 from 1958 vs. current Voigtlander 1.5/50 Nokton
Outer appearence: You can put the Jupiter in your pocket, the Nokton goes more the DSLR route - a bit bulky.
Price: If you are lucky, you will get a Jupiter 3 LTM at eBay between 60 and 80 EUR, the Nokton are more or less in the 250 - 300 EUR range.
Maintenance: Jupiter 3 are old, used, with some previous owners - be careful if they are like new, this very often means never used - because not working. Noktons are mostly first or second hand.
This means that you at least have to do a CLA for the Jupiter lens, which will last 1-2 hours, but will be very worthwhile. check out Brian Sweeneys manual at http://www.pentax-manuals.com/repairs/j3service.pdf
Hands on: Once CLA'ed, the Jupiters aperture and focus ring runs very, very smooth and exact. Nokton is bit stiffer, more like Leica lenses. Both have a "worthy" finish, no rattling, everything feels fine.
Pictures: The bookeh is totally different, look at the examples. The Nokton is way sharper with nice bookeh at fully open aperture. From aperture 4.0 on both are sharp and stunning, no test pic of Nokton at hand (delivery was today), but one with the Jupiter is added (the swan).
Conclusion: If you really want to do serious shots at low light, take the Nokton. The Jupiter 3 is...mmhh, interesting at fully open aperture. If you are looking for the occasional photography at low lights, the Jupiter 3 maybe sufficient, from aperture 4 outdoor its really fine cocerning sharpness (the swan). But make some training for focussing at fully open! The Jupiter 3 is a historic lens, coating is totally different from what today is used, so photos have a different atmosphere.
The Nokton is the more modern lens, but with its own feeling. More bulky! I hope, next week I can make a comparison between the 250 EUR Nokton and the Jupiter 2/50 for 25 EUR - is one stop more open worth ten times the price?
Cheers, Andreas
Jupiter 3, fully open, low lights
Nokton, fully open, low lights
Jupiter 3, aperture 8, daylight
Here we go: Jupiter 3 from 1958 vs. current Voigtlander 1.5/50 Nokton
Outer appearence: You can put the Jupiter in your pocket, the Nokton goes more the DSLR route - a bit bulky.
Price: If you are lucky, you will get a Jupiter 3 LTM at eBay between 60 and 80 EUR, the Nokton are more or less in the 250 - 300 EUR range.
Maintenance: Jupiter 3 are old, used, with some previous owners - be careful if they are like new, this very often means never used - because not working. Noktons are mostly first or second hand.
This means that you at least have to do a CLA for the Jupiter lens, which will last 1-2 hours, but will be very worthwhile. check out Brian Sweeneys manual at http://www.pentax-manuals.com/repairs/j3service.pdf
Hands on: Once CLA'ed, the Jupiters aperture and focus ring runs very, very smooth and exact. Nokton is bit stiffer, more like Leica lenses. Both have a "worthy" finish, no rattling, everything feels fine.
Pictures: The bookeh is totally different, look at the examples. The Nokton is way sharper with nice bookeh at fully open aperture. From aperture 4.0 on both are sharp and stunning, no test pic of Nokton at hand (delivery was today), but one with the Jupiter is added (the swan).
Conclusion: If you really want to do serious shots at low light, take the Nokton. The Jupiter 3 is...mmhh, interesting at fully open aperture. If you are looking for the occasional photography at low lights, the Jupiter 3 maybe sufficient, from aperture 4 outdoor its really fine cocerning sharpness (the swan). But make some training for focussing at fully open! The Jupiter 3 is a historic lens, coating is totally different from what today is used, so photos have a different atmosphere.
The Nokton is the more modern lens, but with its own feeling. More bulky! I hope, next week I can make a comparison between the 250 EUR Nokton and the Jupiter 2/50 for 25 EUR - is one stop more open worth ten times the price?
Cheers, Andreas
Jupiter 3, fully open, low lights
Nokton, fully open, low lights
Jupiter 3, aperture 8, daylight
I've been "cherry-picking" J-3's for a cpuple of years now. Most are quite good. Some are poor. Some are outstanding, as good as a Nikkor 5cm f1.4 or Canon 50/1.5.
This 1955 KMZ J-3 is 1st Rate.
Wide-Open.
One of my Favorites:
Hand-Held, at ~1/15th on my Bessa R2
I have two Nokton 50/1.5's as well. But they are MUCH older than yours! I use one on the Nikon S2 with an adapter, and one on the Prominent...THEY are quite sharp as well.
This 1955 KMZ J-3 is 1st Rate.
Wide-Open.
One of my Favorites:
Hand-Held, at ~1/15th on my Bessa R2
I have two Nokton 50/1.5's as well. But they are MUCH older than yours! I use one on the Nikon S2 with an adapter, and one on the Prominent...THEY are quite sharp as well.
Last edited:
N
Nikon Bob
Guest
Andreas
You did not say what camera you were using these lenses on and if it was a Leica the J-3 may need to be set up to focus properly, especially close up and wide open. I am sure Brian can explain it more clearly. So, I would not discount the J-3 just yet if that is the case.
Bob
You did not say what camera you were using these lenses on and if it was a Leica the J-3 may need to be set up to focus properly, especially close up and wide open. I am sure Brian can explain it more clearly. So, I would not discount the J-3 just yet if that is the case.
Bob
andreas.pichler
Established
Dear fellow enthusiasts,
thank you very much for your comments and example pics.
Bob, my photos are taken with an Epson R-D1. I have had serious focus problems with the J3 first, but thanks to Brians explanations, I could fix it (more or less, but I am quite satisfied). The Nokton is of course the modern variant Voigtlander is selling today.
Brian, I find the quality of your photos astonishing. My J3 produces a sort of "aura" when fully open between light and dark parts of the picture, you can see it very good at the top of the dwarf's hat.
This seems not to be the case with your photos. I assume this is more an optical than a mechanical problem? I would except the Epson itself, the photo taken with the modern Nokton does not have this effect. Looking forward to your comments!
Yours,
Andreas
thank you very much for your comments and example pics.
Bob, my photos are taken with an Epson R-D1. I have had serious focus problems with the J3 first, but thanks to Brians explanations, I could fix it (more or less, but I am quite satisfied). The Nokton is of course the modern variant Voigtlander is selling today.
Brian, I find the quality of your photos astonishing. My J3 produces a sort of "aura" when fully open between light and dark parts of the picture, you can see it very good at the top of the dwarf's hat.
This seems not to be the case with your photos. I assume this is more an optical than a mechanical problem? I would except the Epson itself, the photo taken with the modern Nokton does not have this effect. Looking forward to your comments!
Yours,
Andreas
Spyderman
Well-known
One possibility that could cause the aura / leica glow / flare are cleaning marks or scratches on the glass of the Jupiter...
Kozhe
Well-known
Nice comparison, thanks! This is very interesting for me since I have the J3 and I´m looking for a 35/1.4 Nokton to be my all aroung lens. I do a lot of "dark" shooting and I need a lens I can go out from home with and use it all day long.
I´m not extremely pleasured with the J3 so far. Not sharp enough and overall a worse lens than my J8 but it´s my only lens faster than 2. It also has a misplaced aperture ring (had to make a second mark since the original is like 3mm away) and it has a little hair on the back of the front element. Whoever did a cla on this had no skills, so I guess it could perform a lot better. Anyway I expect the Nokton with its modern coating to be a really superior colour performer.
I´m not extremely pleasured with the J3 so far. Not sharp enough and overall a worse lens than my J8 but it´s my only lens faster than 2. It also has a misplaced aperture ring (had to make a second mark since the original is like 3mm away) and it has a little hair on the back of the front element. Whoever did a cla on this had no skills, so I guess it could perform a lot better. Anyway I expect the Nokton with its modern coating to be a really superior colour performer.
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
Interesting comparison. I bought a J-3 from a fellow member a while ago for my Kiev II and have never regreted it ... I really like the look it produces wide open. Occasionally I get tempted to track down a decent one in LTM but with reports of them seldom being correctly shimmed to focus on a Leica body I'm a little reluctant. Brian Sweeny probably understands these J-3's better than most but he never seems to post here any more! 
Had a 50mm Nokton and sold it ... it was large heavy and never really excited me. It never really did a thing wrong but it had very little character IMO!
Had a 50mm Nokton and sold it ... it was large heavy and never really excited me. It never really did a thing wrong but it had very little character IMO!
Brian Sweeny probably understands these J-3's better than most but he never seems to post here any more!
He posted here eight hours ago in this very thread, Keith ...
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
He posted here eight hours ago in this very thread, Keith ...
I think my brain has liquified and run out my ears Jon!
It's actually very funny when I think about it ... who knows who I was thinking about ... not Brian obviously!
I have a lens coming in from overseas that also exhibits a strange "halo" when used wide-open. Some possible causes- internal haze, misaligned element, heavy cleaning marks, and others. I had a Zeiss Opton Sonnar that was center sharp and everything else had a halo. Big Halo. The rear module was in backwards.
I read a great tip on nelsonfoto for re-assembling J-3 optics, specifically on aligning the front element. Basically: vibrate the lens, stop, and tighten the front retaining ring a bit. Repeat the cycle of vibrating some and tightening a bit. I set the lens in an ultrasonic cleaner -no liquid in it- let it run for a few seconds, and tighten the ring. It sure looks like it works!
The 1955 KMZ lens shown had fungus damage when received, and was in an LTM mount used as a parts donor for a CZJ conversion for a member here. Took all the glass out and it cleaned up nicely. Put it in another LTM mount to test. It is now in a Contax mount.
Keith, did I make your ignore list? (HUMOR)
I read a great tip on nelsonfoto for re-assembling J-3 optics, specifically on aligning the front element. Basically: vibrate the lens, stop, and tighten the front retaining ring a bit. Repeat the cycle of vibrating some and tightening a bit. I set the lens in an ultrasonic cleaner -no liquid in it- let it run for a few seconds, and tighten the ring. It sure looks like it works!
The 1955 KMZ lens shown had fungus damage when received, and was in an LTM mount used as a parts donor for a CZJ conversion for a member here. Took all the glass out and it cleaned up nicely. Put it in another LTM mount to test. It is now in a Contax mount.
Keith, did I make your ignore list? (HUMOR)
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
It's very strange ... I'd just been over at The Zeiss User Forum perusing your lens ads then came back and checked this thread and must have had some sort of short circuit in my brain as your post failed to register with me!
As Jon said ... definitely a 'senior moment!'
andreas.pichler
Established
Keith, don't worry about senior moments. Seniority means experience...and beyond Alzheimer, you met new nice people every day
But back to the main issue of this thread. Two more shots, focus area are the eyes, first one with Jupiter 3, fully open, exposure time around 1/125, ISO 1600, Epson R-D1. Second one: Fully open, exposure time 1/60, ISO 1600 (interesting experience with some other trials: J3 gives you one stop more, I assume because of the coating?). I like both, the Nokton delivers the more "modern" look:
But back to the main issue of this thread. Two more shots, focus area are the eyes, first one with Jupiter 3, fully open, exposure time around 1/125, ISO 1600, Epson R-D1. Second one: Fully open, exposure time 1/60, ISO 1600 (interesting experience with some other trials: J3 gives you one stop more, I assume because of the coating?). I like both, the Nokton delivers the more "modern" look:
Last edited:
andreas.pichler
Established
Some additional comments for the other guys taken up this thread:
@ Ondrej: There are some cleaning marks on the front lens - is this really such a remarkable effect? From aperture 2.8 on, no "aura" is visible.
@ Kozhe: Since I have the lens at home, I am spending some time after work to walk around with. Hmmm. Tommorow night, there is season opening party for our MG Car Club at "Techno Classica" Classic Car show here in Essen, Germany. What lens to take with me? I tend to use the J3 - smaller, more "camouflaging". The Nokton 50 (as the Nokton 40 as well) is a "LENS!". The J3 is a "lens" ;-) If you do not like the command sign - take the J3. Maybe the VC 35/1.4 is interesting, pancake design...but there are some threads in this forum , which are concluding the 35 is a little bit "boring". Rare to find in the "bay"...
Cheers, Andreas
@ Ondrej: There are some cleaning marks on the front lens - is this really such a remarkable effect? From aperture 2.8 on, no "aura" is visible.
@ Kozhe: Since I have the lens at home, I am spending some time after work to walk around with. Hmmm. Tommorow night, there is season opening party for our MG Car Club at "Techno Classica" Classic Car show here in Essen, Germany. What lens to take with me? I tend to use the J3 - smaller, more "camouflaging". The Nokton 50 (as the Nokton 40 as well) is a "LENS!". The J3 is a "lens" ;-) If you do not like the command sign - take the J3. Maybe the VC 35/1.4 is interesting, pancake design...but there are some threads in this forum , which are concluding the 35 is a little bit "boring". Rare to find in the "bay"...
Cheers, Andreas
Light cleaning marks will not have an adverse affect on the image, not to the degree shown. Light haze on a surface or a slight discoloration of the balsam could do that.
I'll start a thread with my findings on the incoming J-3 that exhibits the same aura. For that lens, I have Plan B. If I cannot fix it, it's getting a new "Old and Proven" module.
I'll start a thread with my findings on the incoming J-3 that exhibits the same aura. For that lens, I have Plan B. If I cannot fix it, it's getting a new "Old and Proven" module.
N
Nikon Bob
Guest
Andreas
Was the light level in both B&W examples the same? I would really wonder about the different exposure values if they were. Could it be that the J-3 for some reason is causing the cameras meter to under expose wide open? The first B&W looks quite noisy to me and so does the first colour J-3 example. With digital I am wondering if that is not an indication of under exposure. That might rob some apparent sharpness from those photos.
Bob
Was the light level in both B&W examples the same? I would really wonder about the different exposure values if they were. Could it be that the J-3 for some reason is causing the cameras meter to under expose wide open? The first B&W looks quite noisy to me and so does the first colour J-3 example. With digital I am wondering if that is not an indication of under exposure. That might rob some apparent sharpness from those photos.
Bob
andreas.pichler
Established
Bob (Nikon Bob),
the light level in the two b/w shots was different. But when taking some of the "dwarfs shots" I have recognized, that when using the J3 the R-D1 delivers shorter exposure times.
But thank you very much for the hint that there is maybe a sort of miscalculation (underexposure) when using the J3 - yes, it really seems so. I will make some more try-outs and keep the focus on your assumption.
Yours,
Andreas
the light level in the two b/w shots was different. But when taking some of the "dwarfs shots" I have recognized, that when using the J3 the R-D1 delivers shorter exposure times.
But thank you very much for the hint that there is maybe a sort of miscalculation (underexposure) when using the J3 - yes, it really seems so. I will make some more try-outs and keep the focus on your assumption.
Yours,
Andreas
N
Nikon Bob
Guest
Andreas
Let us know how you make out, I am curious as to the out come.
Bob
Let us know how you make out, I am curious as to the out come.
Bob
telenous
Well-known
I have a J3 in LTM and like it lots. As the examples above show at f/1.5 the lens is somewhat soft compared to a modern lens but gives results that are not far different in that regard than, say, the old Summarit 50 f/1.5 at the same aperture.
What I wonder, and perhaps someone here knows, is the J3 the smallest/lightest 50mm Sonnar lens?
.
What I wonder, and perhaps someone here knows, is the J3 the smallest/lightest 50mm Sonnar lens?
.
Of the F1.5 Sonnars, it is the lightest that I know of- but not the smallest. The Canon 50/1.5 is the smallest, but is like a rock. The J-8 is smaller and lighter, but is F2.
capitalK
Warrior Poet :P
I borrowed one from a fellow RFF member last summer when I got my Bessa. I believe he had it adjusted by Mr. Sweeny and it was a great performer for me, I especially liked it wide open.
